DOCUMENT: WWPUGSND.TXT THE TREATIES OF PUGET SOUND 1854-55 THE TREATY OF MEDICINE CREEK THE TREATY OF POINT ELLIOTT AND THE TREATY OF POINT NO POINT Robert Brockstedt Lane and Barbara Lane This workshop is one of a series that has been developed and implemented by the Institute for the Development of Indian Law, Inc. of Washington, D.C. in conjunction with Cook Christian Training School, Tempe, Arizona. The funds for the project were provided through grant no. 90-I-230 from the Office of Native American Programs, Department of Health, Education and Welfare. THE TREATIES OF PUGET SOUND 1854-55 INTRODUCTION In 1853 Washington Territory was organized and Isaac Ingalls Stevens became the first Governor and the first Superintendent of Indian Affairs for the new Territory. No treaties had as yet been made and ratified with Indians in the new Territory. One of Stevens' first duties was to make treaties with the Indians by which the United States would acquire title to the land. Stevens was in a hurry to extinguish Indian title to the land for several reasons. One of the reasons was to avoid conflict between white settlers and Indians over land. In 1850 Congress had passed the Oregon Donation Land Act which offered free land to settlers who would go to the Northwest. When Washington Territory was created out of the northern part of Oregon Territory, the Donation Land Act was made to apply in Washington. The government was in the awkward position of having offered free land to settlers without first having bought the land from the Indians. The treaties were intended to buy out Indian title to the land. In 1854 Stevens received orders to make treaties with all the Indians in Washington Territory. He organized a treaty commission and began making treaties in the western part of the Territory. He organized the treaty commission in December 1854 and by the end of January 1855, four treaties had been made. The places and dates at which the treaties were signed and the numbers of Indians reported to be included in each treaty are as follows: TREATY DATE INDIANS ------------------------------------------------------------ Treaty of Medicine Creek December 26, 1854 1200 Treaty of Point Elliott January 22, 1855 4992 Treaty of Point No Point January 25, 1855 1316 Treaty of Neah Bay January 31, 1855 596 Stevens attempted to make a fifth treaty in February 1855, but did not succeed. He met with representatives of the Quinault, Chehalis, Cowlitz, and Chinook on the Chehalis River and tried to get them all to sign a treaty agreeing to go on a single reservation to be located later somewhere between Cape Flattery and Gray's Harbor. The Quinault were the only ones willing to sign. Probably this was because the reservation was to be located somewhere within their own territory. The Cowlitz, Chinook, Chehalis and Shoalwater Bay people held out for reservations on the Chehalis River and at Shoalwater Bay. They were later given those reservations, but because they did not sign the treaty which was offered to them they are denied treaty status and treaty rights today. Later Stevens signed a treaty with the Quinault and Quileute. This was negotiated on the Quinault River July 1, 1855 and signed by Stevens in Olympia January 25, 1856. This was the fifth and last treaty which Stevens negotiated in western Washington. All five of the western Washington treaties are similar. The Treaty of Neah Bay contains certain provisions which do not occur in any of the other treaties. The Treaty of Olympia is also somewhat different from all the other treaties. We are concerned here with the first three treaties, the treaties which were made around Puget Sound. Although there are very minor differences in wording and punctuation, the first three treaties are essentially the same and can be examined as a unit. By reading the treaties, it is possible to discover which Indian tribes or bands were included in any one of the treaties, what lands were transferred to the United States, what lands were reserved for the Indians, what rights were kept by the Indians, what was being given up, and what the United States would pay for the lands and rights which were relinquished. The texts of the three Puget Sound treaties are included in this book. [Not included in this version.] These are copies of the printed or published treaties. Also included is a facsimile copy of the original handwritten Treaty of Point No Point. By reading the treaties, it is possible to discover what they say. To discover why they contain the provisions that are written into them, one must look elsewhere. Most of the articles or provisions which are written into the Treaty of Medicine Creek, the Treaty of Point Elliott, and the Treaty of Point No Point are taken directly from earlier treaties made with Indian tribes on the Plains. Only three provisions are written into the western Washington treaties which do not occur in the earlier treaties with the Plains Indians. These provisions are: (1) the article protecting the right of taking fish (2) the article freeing all slaves (3) and the article prohibiting trade with Vancouver's Island The first of these is the only important guarantee of rights which is unique to the Indians in western Washington. In other respects the Stevens treaties appear to secure to the Indians in western Washington much less than is secured in the treaties on which the Washington treaties are based. Stevens received instructions to make treaties with the Indians in Washington from the Commissioner of Indian Affairs who was his immediate superior in the Department of Indian Affairs. The Commissioner gave Stevens certain specific instructions, several general guidelines, and supplied him with some recently made treaties to use as models. Two of the treaties which were sent to Stevens are included in this book for ready reference. [Not included in this version.] They are: the Treaty with the Oto and Missouria Indians, and the Treaty with the Omaha. Comparing the treaties that Stevens made with those that he was sent as models, we can see certain small, but potentially critical differences. Among the most important is the language relating to land transfers and lands reserved to Indians. In the treaties which were negotiated by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs with the Oto and Missouria and with the Omaha, certain lands are ceded by the Indians to the United States and other lands are kept by the Indians. In the treaties which Stevens made in Washington with the tribes around Puget Sound, the Indians cede all their land. Some lands are reserved for their "present use and occupation." Close comparison of the Plains treaties with the Puget Sound treaties discloses other differences. The Stevens treaties took much and left or gave little. One of the more interesting sources of information about the treaties, apart from studying the documents themselves, is in the comments and evaluations of them made by the men who helped to negotiate them. Two of the men who served on the Stevens treaty commission in western Washington were George Gibbs and Benjamin Franklin Shaw. Gibbs was a lawyer who may have been responsible for some of the treaty language. Shaw served as the interpreter who translated the treaty language into Chinook Jargon. Included immediately following this page are evaluations of the treaties made by Gibbs and Shaw. Also included are maps showing the location of the groups included in the treaties, the lands ceded under the several treaties, and the extent of white presence in western Washington at treaty times. GENERAL GIBBS'S LETTER ON THE CAUSE OF THE INDIAN TROUBLES IN WASHINGTON TERRITORY. The following are extracts from a letter sent by George Gibbs, dated "Fort Vose, on Port Townsend, W. T., Jan. 7, 1857," to James Swan. "That the governor's treaties had a great deal to do in fomenting this war there is no doubt. Those on the Sound were too much hurried, and the reservations allowed them were insufficient; but his grand blunder was in bringing together the Nez Perces, Walla Wallas, Yakamas, and others into one council, and cramming a treaty down their throats in a hurry. Still, the treaties were only one item in the reasons for disaffection. Treaties had been made with the Willamette and Columbia River Indians, first by a board of commissioners, then by a superintendent, and none of them ratified, nor payments made under them. The Donation Law had very unjustly given to settlers the lands before the title was extinguished. The tribes whose country was occupied had visibly perished, and the bolder tribes of the prairies east of the mountains were determined that they would keep us out, at all events till they were paid. They saw that the troops were few, and scattered in distant and petty posts; that they were not mounted, and only one station in their country, which they could easily exterminate. The Sound Indians, encouraged by hope of support from the Yakamas, whom they feared themselves, thought that they, in like manner, could clear the Sound, and they came pretty near doing it. But for Captain Maloney's fortunate return, they probably would have raised all the tribes, taken the unguarded post at Steilacoom, supplied themselves with arms and ammunition, and whipped us out. It needed only one great success to have enabled them to do this. As to the conduct of the war on this side (that is, west of the Cascade range of mountains), it has been well managed. Captain Keyes and Colonel Casey, who succeeded him in command, acted with judgment and energy; but the war on the other side, directed by Colonel Wright, has been a perfect farce. He has proclaimed peace when it only exists because the whites have been driven from the country. He left his communications behind him unguarded, suffered the Cascades to be taken and burned, ran back, gave up an expedition on which he started, undertook another, sent back for more troops, and finally, at the head of eleven companies of regulars, after talking and feeding the hostiles on sugar and flour, marched back without taking a single one of the murderers, without killing an enemy in the field, without dictating terms, or doing any thing whatever to chastise or subdue those who were in arms. The result, is, that all communication by way of the Plains is abandoned; that other tribes, encouraged by the inefficiency of the troops, or, rather, of their commander, have joined; and that the Indians hold undisputed control over the country. "Here the principal difficulty will arise from the non- fulfillment of the treaties with the friendly tribes. The treaty with the Nisquallies, &c., who took up arms, was the only one ratified, and of course they will receive their annuities; while the Lower Sound tribes, who have remained peaceable, and have been compelled to suffer great though necessary inconvenience, remain neglected. Whether the treaties are good or not, they ought to be ratified, or at least provision made by law to pay their annuities as promised. "The conduct of the government has been most extraordinary. They have suffered a regular and a volunteer war to go on for a whole year, and have neither authorized nor stopped the latter. Governor Stevens and General Wool have been quarreling, and they have not decided in favor of either. In fact, the inaction or want of decision shown at Washington has been most culpable. * * * * * "I can not stop to correct the above, or add what may, perhaps, be necessary to give connection to the data. What I have meant to show was that the war sprung partly from ill- judged legislation, partly from previous unratified treaties, and partly from recent blunders. Much is due to the natural struggle between the hostile races for the sovereignty of the soil. The land is at the root of the war. Many outrages have been committed since it begun, it is true, but it was not private wrongs that led to it. The numerous outrages committed by Indians on whites have not been taken into account by those who bleat about the 'poor Indian.'" MEDICINE CREEK TREATY. Annual Address by Colonel B. F. Shaw. (Note. - Colonel B. F. Shaw came to Oregon in 1844. In 1848 he was in the Cayuse War, his father, Captain William Shaw, of Marion County, commanding a company. In 1853, 1854, and 1855 he was in the Indian service much of the time, his knowledge of Indian character and the esteem he was held in by the Indians rendering him peculiarly efficient in his efforts. In 1855-56 he was one of the principal commanders of the Yakima War, and rendered excellent service.) Having been invited by the Oregon Historical Society to prepare a paper on the subject of the early settlement of this country, I have consented, believing that an address by one who helped to make some of the early history might be of some benefit. I am well aware of the fact that there is a disposition on the part of those who have come to this Coast in palace cars to look upon the achievements of the earlier settlers as matters of no great consequence; while on the other hand, some of the old settlers may be inclined to claim too much; and for these reasons I have always felt a delicacy in obtruding on the public anything I might have to say about the history of the early settlement in the states of Oregon and Washington. But as I have recently read newspaper articles which, to say the least, are misleading, and remember one lecture in particular which is a downright misrepresentation of all the facts in the history of the times that they pretend to treat of, in order that these statements may not be taken as true history, I have finally gained my own consent to give my views on a part only of the transactions of the early times. I shall confine myself in what I have to say to the earliest treaties made with the Indians in Washington Territory. I do this because I consider that these treaties and the men that made them have been misrepresented and maligned in a most outrageous manner by Judge Wickersham, in a lecture he delivered in Tacoma some years ago. The style of this lecture, which he rightly calls the Indian side of the question, is all that could be desired; but unfortunately has nothing to back it save the bare statements of the very Indians who fomented the discontent that led up to the great Indian wars of 1855-1856. These Indians being interested, and no doubt wishing to please Judge Wickersham, discovering that he was industriously hunting some foundation for his theory, and through his anxiety to make out a case they saw a chance to throw off some of the odium which attached to their former actions in engaging in what, to them, proved to be a very unpopular war; and this being the case, it follows that the statements which Judge Wickersham represents as facts are no facts at all, but were the ideas that the Indian orators of that time conjured up in their imagination to scare and induce the other Indians to join them in making a war of extermination against the American settlers. Judge Wickersham has taken all of these Indian stories as gospel truths, and has proceeded to outdo himself, if that were possible, in his eloquent and indignant denunciations of the great wrongs which he says were perpetrated upon these poor Indians by the men who made the treaty of "Medicine Creek." The wonder is that he did not add to his lecture the stories that the Indians circulated at that time to the effect that the Government intended to transport all the Indians out on to a lonely island in the Pacific Ocean where the sun never shines, but is always dark, and where the mosquitoes were so large that they would kill an Indian at every bite. I have no doubt but that Judge Wickersham would have been delighted to find such valuable material for his lecture and would have related the story in a much more interesting manner than I can ever hope to do. Nothing seems to be so improbable to Judge Wickersham's mind as the fact that an interested Indian might be induced to tell a lie, particularly if he was an interested party. The records, carefully kept at that time, together with the testimony of a goodly number of white men, do not seem to have any weight with Judge Wickersham; but let old "Luke," or some other Indian, tell him some ridiculous story, and he will exhaust all of his reasoning power in trying to make it appear that a statement from such a source is the truth - that what never did happen was the most likely thing to happen, "for some old Indian had told him so." But before attempting to reply to Judge Wickersham's eloquent defense of the savage life and his yet more eloquent condemnation of the march of civilization, I will have to go back to the very early settlements in order to show the condition the Indians were in when the American settlers first came to the Coast. He found the Indian here before him. The Indian was a wanderer, and had no permanent home. He did not claim the exclusive right to a single acre of land. He had no idea of any rights except the right of "brute force." He was a usurper himself and had driven out some weaker party and had taken his hunting ground by force. The Indians had no laws to govern themselves and knew no law except the law of force. They had no religion of their own; they had no rulers, save that the biggest and loudest- talking, blustering bully was a sort of chief who directed them to some extent by out-talking them and making them afraid of him, or by pretending to be inspired with "Tamanawas" - medicine which gave him the power to cast out evil spirits and to heal the sick; and as he was supposed to cure by his "Tamanawas" he was held responsible for the lives of his patients. If it happened at any time that too many of his patients died, the relatives and friends of the deceased were authorized by common consent to kill these "Tamanawas" men: so it often happened that these chiefs and "Tamanawas" men passed over to the happy hunting ground without ever knowing what hurt them, and many of the lesser lights lived in fear of taking a like trip to the same region. Another thing which seemed to and did disturb the Coast Indians was what they called a "Seatco," a sort of walking delegate from the other world, who always came at night and drove the Indians from their peaceful slumbers into the forest, and then took their earthly possessions, and applied them to his own use. A great portion of the time the Indians would have their "Tamanawas" men employed to drive away and keep off the "Seatcos." For this service the Indians had to contribute to the medicine man a great portion of their worldly possessions, which did not leave them in the most happy condition, to say the least. Now this was the happy situation of the Indians when the American settler arrived on the scene. Every one lived in fear of these "Tamanawas" men and these "Tamanawas" men lived in fear of everybody else. The Indians did not know that he had any right to the soil, as he made no use of it. The only right he did claim was the right to roam over the country in common with everybody else - that was all the use he had for the country. He did not know how to cultivate the soil, and did not wish to know; for when he did learn that the soil would produce grain and vegetables, he would not use it for that purpose, but preferred to roam over it and idle away his time. Now these are some of the privileges that our friends who take the Indian side of the question accuse us of robbing the Indian out of. We deny that we have robbed him out of anything, save and except his right to roam over thousands of acres of productive land that he made no use of, and have compelled him to abandon his savage life, and live like a civilized man. We have given them permanent homes, and have tried to teach them to cultivate the soil and to become useful citizens; and we do not regret that we have done so. Now the American settlers who came in early times were as different from the Indians as it was possible for them to be. They were men of great energy and push. They had traveled 2000 miles over the dusty plains, and were aggressive and persevering and did not know what the word fail meant. They had painted on the sides of their wagonbeds in large letters "54:40 or fight," and did not expect to reclaim the country from the Indians, but did expect to maintain the rights of the United States to the country against the claims of Great Britain. They brought with them their wives, children, their household goods, their plows, harrows, and other tools necessary to make them permanent homes. And on arriving in this country they immediately proceeded to mark out and take possession of all the land, each for himself, that they believed the Government would allow them to hold - generally 640 acres; and they claimed the first exclusive right to the soil, and took steps to enforce their rights by fencing and excluding all men from trespassing on their land. This movement in permanently settling the country was not much taken notice of by the Indians at first, as the country was large and the Indians did not have any idea of the number of the white people, but thought them not much more numerous than themselves. This exclusive and aggressive policy went on, however, the American settlers increased and much of the public domain was thus claimed and fenced, thus excluding everybody therefrom, Indians as well as whites. This condition continuing from year to year, enlarged the settlements of the whites, as well as their flocks, and correspondingly restricted the area of country over which the Indian was wont to roam at will. In due time this changed condition of affairs naturally created discontent among the Indians and several times we had wars with the different tribes, but lack of combination among them saved the white settlers. While these settlements continued to grow the discontent among the Indians also continued to increase. The two antagonistic principles - civilization and savagery - coming in contact one with the other, finally culminated in the great Indian war of 1855-56. This war was a natural result of the aggressive policy of the white man coming in contact with the idle habits of the Indians. The American settler without the consent of his own Government had proceeded to appropriate to his own exclusive use large tracts of the public domain, and had claimed the right to exclude all men from trespassing on his holdings. This had been going on for a good many years; and it had become a question only of time when the white man would absorb the whole country and leave the Indians without an abiding place; and it was for this particular reason that it was thought best to treat with these Indians as early as possible and set aside certain tracts of land in order that they might have some place for their exclusive use. This was the policy of the Government, and there is no doubt but that it was intended to benefit the Indians, as the Government had permitted the settlers to take up and hold all the best part of the country, without being consulted. I will now give my recollections about the treaty of Medicine Creek and how it was made. Before proceeding, however, let me say that Medicine Creek is in Thurston County, a few miles east of the City of Olympia, Washington, and was within the area claimed by the Nesqually tribe of Indians. About three weeks before the council was held, as interpreter for Governor Isaac I. Stevens, who was also Superintendent of Indian Affairs, I was directed to go out and notify all the Indians living within the boundaries of the proposed purchase that a council would be held at Medicine Creek on December 24, A. D. 1854. In accordance with the said instructions, I went over the whole district and notified all the Indians of any note that a council would be held at the date mentioned, and at each village visited I was called upon to state the object of this council. In reply I made this statement to them: "That the Government, seeing that the American settlers were taking up the country very rapidly, and that in the future it was probable that the settlements would be made even more rapidly, and while the Government was not disposed to interfere and stop the settlements from being made, yet so long as the so-called Indian title was not extinguished, if they would sell such rights as they claimed to the Government, then the Government would set apart reservations for their exclusive use, and grant such other privileges as could be agreed upon at the council." And I also told them that they could see, as well as I could, that the settlement could not be stopped, and if something was not done soon the white man would absorb the whole country and leave the Indian without a spot to pitch his tent upon; and for the consideration of these questions the Government invited them to meet its representatives at Medicine Creek in mutual council. Furthermore, I told them that the Government desired the Indians to consider these questions in advance. First to sell all their rights in the land, or "illakee," to the Government for a moderate sum of money, to be paid in yearly installments; and, secondly, to accept such reservations and other privileges as could be agreed upon at that council. As to the details, I recommended them to come to the council and hear for themselves what the representatives of the Government had to say. These were all the inducements that were held out to these Indians to come to the Medicine Creek Council, where Judge Wickersham says they were robbed of their country by the deliberate villainy of the Superintendent of Indian Affairs, by misrepresentations, intimidation, and downright forgery. To any one who knew Governor Stevens it is not necessary to say one word, as every one who lived in those times knows that the idea of his being a party to any misrepresentations to the Indians is wholly ridiculous, wholly without foundation, save as obtained from a lying Indian, and related second-handed by a white man who seems to think that he is justified in endeavoring to tarnish the names of the first executive of Washington Territory and all those who assisted him in his desire to ameliorate the condition of the Indians. The reputation Governor Stevens had, and justly, too, for truth and veracity, the humane and kindly feelings he had toward the Indians, together with his knowledge that they were being pressed to the wall and driven away from their hunting and fishing grounds, and his well known desire to do all that lay in his power to improve their condition, ought to have saved him from such an abortive attempt to blacken his character and that of those who were with him. I venture to say that there was not a man of any note among all the Indians at that council who did not know that they had not a single right that could be maintained by either force of arms or by law. Every one of them recognized the fact that there was no power that could protect them from the encroachment of the white settlers, save and except the Government of the United States; and hence their willingness to make and sign a treaty was natural, and no extra inducements were required to get them to do so. The Government had already extended its jurisdiction over the whole country, and Indians knew, as well as everybody 20 else, that whether there was any treaty or not, the Government had possession of, the whole country and could do as they pleased with it, with or without a treaty; and, therefore, there was no incentive to do any act contrary to what was right and just. Besides this, the gentlemen who made this treaty were all highminded and honorable men, who would have scorned to misrepresent anything, even to an Indian. Personally, I have always believed that there was a great deal of humbug about making any treaties with the Indians. My plan would have been to have taught them from the start that the Government of the United States was the only proper power to rule, as it was in reality; and I would not have encouraged the Indian to believe that he was one of the high contracting parties of the making and signing of a treaty, when he was not, as the other party already had full possession of the property he was supposed to sign away. My opinion had nothing to do with the matter, however, as the superintendent was instructed to make these treaties, and I believe that he did his work honestly and faithfully. At this point I desire to say that Judge Wickersham is greatly mistaken in saying that there was any great difference among the Indians about making and signing the Medicine Creek treaty. I do not believe that there was at that time. This position can be successfully supported upon the testimony of good men. The discontent, if any, was created afterward, when the Indians had gone to their respective homes and consulted a lot of white men, who were living with Indian women and who were interested in seeing that the country remained common pasture as long as possible; and some of the politicians of that day did not hesitate to encourage the discontent for political effect. The treaty was made on the 25th day of December, 1854, the second day of the council. After the Governor had made his speech all the Indians were invited to speak and tell what they believed and were willing to do about making and signing the treaty. Everything was conducted open and above board. After all the Indians had spoken, the treaty was brought out, and was explained slowly by paragraphs, and whenever there was any doubt as to the Indians understanding it, it was repeated until it was understood by them. It took nearly all day to read and interpret it, and after it was believed that all the Indians fully understood it the treaty was then signed by the Commissioner and Secretary, and then all the Indians of any note signed it. Quiemuth, Leschi, Stahi, Slugamas, Snow-ho-dump-shoot, and all the other Indians of any note affixed their signatures to the treaty. There was no compulsion or persuasion necessary, as they all seemed anxious to sign it. These are the facts that I know of my own knowledge for I stood by the whole time and saw each Indian make his mark, and the Secretary write his name opposite to his mark. It makes no difference how many times Judge Wickersham may quote old "Luke" to throw a doubt on the subject. Old "Luke" has simply forgotten what took place, or more likely has discovered the fact that Judge Wickersham was anxiously smelling with his nose close down to the ground and ready to follow and give mouth to any kind of a trail, even a false one, so long as it led him to something against the men who made the treaty at Medicine Creek. Old "Luke" being willing to throw off some of the blame that had resulted from his former actions, and seeing how easily he had already stuffed him with other stories, may have concluded to give the Judge a yarn out of the whole cloth. Judge Wickersham has given a pathetic picture of the "Potlatch" as received from old "Luke" or "Paul." I do not believe that he vouches for it as an eye witness. He says on that dreary Christmas day the distribution of presents and food was so scant that the Indians refused to take either and the poor Indians went around all day and nearly perished with hunger. I know this story to be false. There were provisions in great abundance for all, and the Indians not only filled themselves up with "Boston muckamuck," but carried some with them to their homes. Anybody who knows anything about an Indian would not believe such a story, and it has taken nearly forty years to find a white man who would relate such a tale. No other white man ever knew of an Indian refusing to accept food when it was offered to him; for he never refused to eat your food, even if he intended to kill you an hour later. Judge Wickersham quotes another ridiculous story of "Luke," or some other apostle, to the effect that "Old Mike Simmons," like a ruffian, had threatened to make "Leschi" sign the treaty. In the first place Leschi did not refuse to sign the treaty, and Colonel Simmons made no such a threat, there being no occasion for him to do so. Colonel Simmons would not have made such a threat even if Leschi had refused to sign the treaty. To anyone who knew the Colonel no denial would be necessary. But to those who had not the pleasure of meeting that great, big-hearted old pioneer, the ace of trumps in the whole pack of cards - a man whose sympathy was as broad as the universe, and whose charities went far beyond his means - a man who was the first to settle on the north side of the Columbia River, for the express purpose of holding it by occupancy - a man who had always been the best friend to the Indians among all, and had always stood out stoutly against all the wrongs that had been perpetrated on them by the evil-disposed, irresponsible gang that went up and down the Sound selling the worst kind of whisky, robbing them of their property, and even killing them sometimes with impunity - to those persons unacquainted with the conditions prevailing in this country fifty years ago, it is proper to say that Colonel Simmons was incapable of being a party to any transaction whatever that would wrong an Indian out of anything that rightfully belonged to him. Abuses of the Indians in various directions by unscrupulous white renegades, above alluded to, were some of the things that Colonel Simmons fought against with all his might; and it does seem to be cruel injustice that after the lapse of 40 years, a man should appear in our midst and endeavor to distort the history of the early days and try to blacken his memory by the repetition of such ridiculous falsehoods obtained from wholly irresponsible sources. The selection of the reservations was another matter which Judge Wickersham criticized severely. He thinks that the location of these would have made him fight, too. I will not undertake to say in this connection that these were wisely located at that time; but the fact that the policy of the Government was to have one general reservation, and to make all the improvements on that one, with the object of inducing all the Indians to locate upon that one, and the further fact that the Indians did not know what they did want, and the still further fact that there was a provision in the treaty whereby these reservations could be changed when necessary, probably prevented the Council from taking as much time to discuss the reservation question as would have been wise. Leschi wanted all of Pierce County and a goodly part of King for a few Indian ponies to run on. That was out of the question. No one thought then, nor does anyone believe now, that such a concession ought to have been made. I must confess that I differ from Judge Wickersham about the reservations being the cause of the war. The Yakima and Cayuse Indians went to war at the same time, and they both had splendid reservations. No, the reason that these Indians went to war was that they saw all the country being taken up and their privileges being curtailed from year to year. At length they imagined that their condition was becoming worse all the time, and they finally became desperate, forgetting for the moment that the Government through the Indian Department was making every effort in its power to improve their condition. Thus refusing to look to the future as anything but dark and gloomy, but turning their thoughts backward in contemplating the many fancied wrongs they had suffered and, no doubt, these treaties coming as they did after many of the valuable places had been taken up by the white man, brought to the Indian's mind more vividly all these things that they had been brooding over for years, so that they finally forgot everything except revenge, and arose in a mighty effort to stay the oncoming tide of civilization, and turn the country back to a savage condition again. Who is there who regrets that they did not succeed; there is not one, not even the Indians who were engaged in the war. The question was, shall a great country, with many resources, be turned over to a few Indians to roam over and make a precarious living in, making no use of the soil or timber and other resources, or should it be turned over to civilized man who would develop it in every direction, and make it the abiding place of millions of white people instead of a few hundred Indians? I confess that I was one of the men who believed in getting the Indians out of the way by paying them for all their rights, and locating them on good reservations where they would receive the protection of the Indian Department, and where they would be removed from the influences of the evil-disposed white men who were selling them bad whiskey and robbing and demoralizing them in every way, thus leading them to swift destruction. And I further confess that I was one of the men who believed in allowing the Anglo-Saxon race to take up the burden that the Indians were incapable of carrying. And I do not regret now what was then done by the men who made the treaty at Medicine Creek. One other person, Sidney S. Ford, Jr., and myself are the only living witnesses to the making and signing of these treaties. All the others have gone to their long rest. In looking back over the 50 years that have elapsed since the making of these treaties, I can not see wherein the Indian has been injured or mistreated. He had lived in this country for ages, and had not made much more impression upon it than a good-sized colony of beavers. He now has his home. He has been paid for all his rights, and has no real reason to complain, unless it be that he is no longer considered a savage. But look at what civilization has done for a sparsely settled frontier village. Seattle only had a name and a few huts. Tacoma, Spokane, Walla Walla, Everett, Bellingham, and scores of other smaller cities and towns were yet unborn. Even Minneapolis, St. Paul, Kansas City, Denver, Omaha, and Salt Lake had scarcely more than a name. Four great transcontinental lines have spanned the continent since that time, and all the great resources of this wonderful country are being developed. A great ocean commerce is now being built up, and the dream of the pioneer is at last coming to be an accomplished fact. And we who have been in this country from the first inception of the new order of things, are beginning to see the fruition of our hopes; and as we are nearing our last sleep we will ever pray that this American civilization may not stop until it penetrates every nook and corner of this continent. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :: -= THE FOURTH WORLD DOCUMENTATION PROJECT =- :: :: A service provided by :: :: The Center For World Indigenous Studies :: :: www.cwis.org :: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Originating at the Center for World Indigenous Studies, Olympia, Washington USA www.cwis.org © 1999 Center for World Indigenous Studies (All Rights Reserved. References up to 500 words must be referenced to the Center for World Indigenous Studies and/or the Author Copyright Policy Material appearing in the Fourth World Documentation Project Archive is accepted on the basis that the material is the original, unoccupied work of the author or authors. Authors agree to indemnify the Center for World Indigenous Studies, and DayKeeper Press for all damages, fines and costs associated with a finding of copyright infringement by the author or by the Center for World Indigenous Studies Fourth World Documentation Project Archive in disseminating the author(s) material. In almost all cases material appearing in the Fourth World Documentation Project Archive will attract copyright protection under the laws of the United States of America and the laws of countries which are member states of the Berne Convention, Universal Copyright Convention or have bi-lateral copyright agreements with the United States of America. Ownership of such copyright will vest by operation of law in the authors and/or The Center for World Indigenous Studies, Fourth World Journal or DayKeeper Press. The Fourth World Documentation Project Archive and its authors grant a license to those accessing the Fourth World Documentation Project Archive to render copyright materials on their computer screens and to print out a single copy for their personal non-commercial use subject to proper attribution of the Center for World Indigenous Studies Fourth World Documentation Project Archive and/or the authors. Questions may be referred to: Director of Research Center for World Indigenous Studies PMB 214 1001 Cooper Point RD SW Suite 140 Olympia, Washington 98502-1107 USA 360-754-1990 www.cwis.org usaoffice@cwis.org OCR Software provided by Caere Corporation